The arms trade and Israel's attack on Gaza

Israel has once again unleashed the full force of its military against the captive Palestinian population, particularly in the besieged Gaza Strip, in an inhumane and illegal act of military aggression. Israel's ability to launch such devastating attacks with impunity largely stems from the vast international military cooperation and trade that it maintains with complicit governments across the world. Over the period 2008-19, the US is set to provide military aid to Israel worth $30bn, while Israeli annual military exports to the world have reached billions of dollars.

In recent years, European countries have exported billions of euros' worth of weapons to Israel, and the EU has furnished Israeli military companies with research grants worth hundreds of millions. Emerging economies such as India, Brazil and Chile are rapidly increasing their military trade and cooperation with Israel, despite their stated support for Palestinian rights. By importing and exporting arms to Israel and facilitating the development of Israeli military technology, governments are effectively sending a clear message of approval for Israel's military aggression, including its war crimes and possible crimes against humanity.

• Seumas Milne (Gaza: This shameful injustice will only end if the cost of it rises, 16 July) says that it is "beyond the realm of fantasy" for Israel to claim that it is responding to rocket fire "out of the clear blue sky", yet before the launch of Operation Protective Edge on 6 July, Hamas averaged three rockets a day from 14 to 29 June and 17 a day from 30 June to 6 July. Its attacks on Israel target civilians and residential areas.

Milne also claims that the blockade of Gaza is illegal, whereas the UN's Palmer report concluded that it is legal. Hamas is internationally recognised as a terrorist organisation, whose objective is not a peaceful solution to the Middle East's problems but the destruction of the state of Israel. Hamas has rejected a ceasefire, brokered by Egypt and supported by the Arab League and the UN, and greeted the start of Israel's five-hour ceasefire by firing rockets.

Milne praises Hamas's "defiance and resistance" and says it "has shown it can hit back across Israel". This is no less than the glorification of terror. His claim that there is a "power imbalance" is to imply that it is wrong for Israel to defend itself. The current crisis is a tragedy of Hamas's making and its latest actions only deter the great majority of Israelis who want a secure and just peace with their Palestinian neighbours.Terry PhilpotLimpsfield Chart, Surrey

• Having lived in Israel for the past five years, I have seen first-hand the impact that ongoing terrorism has had on the country. In 2005, the Palestinian people had a great opportunity to create a new life for themselves in Gaza, but under the direction of Hamas, they turned to terrorism. Hamas consistently uses the people of Gaza as human shields and locates rockets in populated areas. Where is your condemnation of Hamas?Doron YoungerwoodModi'in, Israel

• Seumas Milne argues that the price of Israel's occupation needs to be raised. One way of doing this is to challenge Israel's claim that it is and is not an occupation.

This convenient ambiguity has enabled it to cherry-pick the Geneva convention and justify treating the occupied Palestinians differently from Israeli citizens while simultaneously annexing, expropriating and settling chunks of their territory. After 47 years, it is time to call the Israeli bluff. The Palestinian thinker Sam Bahour and I have proposed that a firm deadline be set for Israel to make up its mind definitively one way or the other. If it is an occupation, Israel's – supposedly provisional – custodianship should be brought to a swift end. If it is not an occupation, there is no justification for denying equal rights to everyone who is subject to Israeli rule, whether Israeli or Palestinian.

The key is to remove the status quo as the default option. So, should Israel choose not to choose, other states may interpret this to mean in effect that it intends to hold on to the occupied territories indefinitely and hold Israel accountable to the equality benchmark. The clutch of international laws pertaining to apartheid rather than occupation would then come into force. The hope is that the Israeli people would rebel against the pariah status this would entail and vote in a new government ready to do a genuine two-state deal before it really is too late.Tony KlugLondon

• In your editorial on Gaza (17 July), after the mention of an Israeli airstrike on Saturday in which 22 were killed, we are told that "those on the ground did not deny that the Hamas-affiliated police chief of Gaza City was sheltering there". By suggesting that it is relevant that this accusation wasn't denied, the Guardian appears to be endorsing the Israeli use of extrajudicial executions of Palestinian public servants. It would be inconceivable to write this way if the situation were reversed.Sam PlayleLondon

• When the Arab world media is seen with rare unanimous voice to be holding Hamas responsible for the current Gaza war, it is fascinating that the Guardian remains consistent in condemning Israel alone. Which one is reporting news and which one its own prejudices?Peter SimpsonPinner, Middlesex

• This article was amended on 20 July 2014. In an earlier version, an editing error led to Doron Youngerwood's address appearing as "Modi'in, West Bank".